Man up, Lance. Man the f*ck up and admit it. You know it, we know it. You're going to lose the titles anyway, if you want to be petty and not say anything out of spite, that's your choice, but you're going to be a title-less nobody and we all know why.

Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.

Day what you want, but what this is is a very calculated strategy on the pay of a man who doped, thought he got away with it, and very much does not want you to see a parade of experts testify about his old samples. But most of all he doesn't want you to see George Hincapie on the stand. Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.

Cool story, bro: Not to get too political, but earlier today I had a long discussion with someone in which I, at length, compared Mitt Romney's tax evasion to Lance Armstrong's PED use. Guess I'm not going to be able to re-use that particular simile as many times as I'd hoped.

Adolf Oliver Nipples:Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.

Yeah but no one will remember that. They'll remember him as the guy who was disgraced and thrown out of his sport.

JohnBigBootay: Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.

Absolutely. Hincapie would've crucified him from the stand.

Adolf Oliver Nipples:Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.

You're entire house is wallpapered with Livestrong armbands, isn't it?

JohnBigBootay:Day what you want, but what this is is a very calculated strategy on the pay of a man who doped, thought he got away with it, and very much does not want you to see a parade of experts testify about his old samples. But most of all he doesn't want you to see George Hincapie on the stand. Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.

If you assume I care.

I consider doping to be acceptable. I'd much rather watch Mark McGuire pop 'em into the river than see clever dicks hit singles to let their guy on third get a run in.

How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.

His excuse is such horse shiat for not fighting the findings. He put his family on all sorts of hold whenever he trained. It was a sacrifice he and his family were willing to make. His training was literally hell on wheels. Now he just has to use some of his money to fight for what he claims is legitimately and rightly his. And he quits. GUILTY.

I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.

Oh, and I know everyone else doped. I just can't stand the arrogance of the man steadfastly standing there and trying to have us believe he was clean. All the while one after another of the teammates who pulled his ass up the mountain were found to be dirty. What I STILL find shocking is that so many diehard fans would believe this control freak egomaniac micromanager could have THAT many dopers in his camp but somehow he not know. Please, give it up already. You're hero is a juicer. I freely admit he was the best at that one race as they were all doing it. Just don't try to tell me he was clean the whole time.

Confabulat:Adolf Oliver Nipples: Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.

Yeah but no one will remember that. They'll remember him as the guy who was disgraced and thrown out of his sport.

Indeed - just like no one outside of San Francisco considers Barry Bonds the Home Run King.

CommieTaoist:I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.

Members of Armstrong's cycling team were set to testify against him including George Hincapie, who was an assist in all 7 of Armstrong's tour wins . It's not just Landis.

cameroncrazy1984:JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.

Yes, that's it. He just got tired. A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

That's the ticket.

Without having the evidence, and with all the uncertainty that surrounds each of these cases, I'm not even going to venture an opinion on whether or not he's guilty or innocent of doping.

But that said, I can buy this course of action as legit. I don't know if I do quite yet since I just heard about it, but it's at least plausible to me.

The accusations are never going to stop. He last won the Tour what, seven years ago and he first faced allegations in 1999 and he's still having to answer for it? I can see where a guy would finally be like "Fark it."

I'm not defending him....as I said I don't know all the details regarding all the allegations. But I can see a guy just tiring of pouring piles of money and time down a hole with no end in sight.